NEW CORPORATE ROLE IN SUPPORTING THE ARTS

“It’s a whole new ballgame when it comes to corporate support of the arts,” states Michael Wall, vice president and manager of special events at Merrill Lynch, a corporation that recently provided major support to the Joffrey Ballet and New York City Ballet.

“The days are gone when a corporation made a contribution just to get a tiny line at the bottom of a page in the program. While corporations want to be philanthropic, there are also ways to reward them for doing this. Development people (at dance companies) have to understand the needs of corporations, and we all have to work together.”

Although corporate support of dance companies is still a relatively recent phenomenon, evidence of its growth and the influential role it now plays is everywhere in the dance world.

Any troupe of more than minuscule size hires a director of development these days, and larger companies often have a sizable staff in that area. “A concerted effort to attract corporate support, increase corporate representation on our board and involve corporations in the life of the company only began about two years ago,” states Carol Landers, New York City Ballet’s assistant director of development.

Fifteen years ago, the corporate role in dance support was virtually nonexistent. In 1973, a group of arts-minded businessmen led by Anthony Bliss (now co-chairman of the Joffrey’s board of directors) founded the National Corporate Fund for Dance to develop a business base of support for leading U.S. dance companies.

While 17 corporations contributed a total of $68,500 that first year, the fund’s 1986 campaign raised $523,450 from 121 corporations. The fund distributes this money on a percentage basis to eight constituent dance companies whose annual budget is $1.5 million or more (American Ballet Theatre, Alvin Ailey, Merce Cunningham, Eliot Feld, Martha Graham, Houston Ballet, the Joffrey, Paul Taylor), according to budget size.

The amounts received range from ABT’s $130,862 to Graham’s $20,938, and they represent an unrestricted donation toward general operating expenses.

Under the fund’s recently established category of Award Members, created to extend financial support to a wider range of companies (whose budgets range from $250,000 to $1.5 million), additional grants of $5,000 were given to the Trisha Brown Company, David Gordon Pick Up Co., Hubbard Street Dance Company and Ohio Ballet. (This year, the San Francisco-based company of Margaret Jenkins becomes the fund’s fifth Award Member.)

The fund serves as a convenient conduit, inspiring corporations to make one sizable donation that will benefit several dance companies. It has also played an important catalytic role:

“We can pat ourselves on the back for being good teachers, because corporations have gone off and supported dance companies on their own, often while still remaining with the fund,” remarks Carole Dioguardi, executive director of the fund.

General operating support, of the type given by the fund, is also given to dance companies by some corporations but large-scale support is usually attracted by a specific event: an important tour, an anniversary, a new production, a festival. Philip Morris has sponsored the Joffrey Ballet’s national tours since the company’s 1981-82 25th anniversary season, giving $550,000 over that period, and has given similar support to the Ailey tours (national and international) since 1981.

In addition to these grants, made through the corporation’s contributions budget, it has provided separate, more sizable amounts through its cultural affairs department, which is concerned with marketing and promotional campaigns and pays for highly visible advertisements, colorful brochures and posters, and community outreach events in tour cities.

“We provide a visibility that the companies could never dream of paying for themselves,” says Stephanie French, director of cultural and contributions programs at Philip Morris. Touring has a particular appeal for her corporation because it creates opportunities for encouraging participation in cities where Philip Morris has employees.

Philip Morris has also supported Dance Theater of Harlem since 1976 and has been a major, highly visible sponsor of the Brooklyn Academy of Music’s annual Next Wave Festival. Its pattern of ongoing support to these organizations would seem to belie Dioguardi’s fear that such marketing-oriented giving might prove fickle and short-term.

Like the National Corporate Fund for Dance, Philip Morris has recently added a program to provide support for smaller dance companies. It funds 25 troupes through its Dance Project, established in 1985. “We wanted to support a group of dance companies that, taken together, were composed of key people in the field,” says French. These companies (including those of Laura Dean, Erick Hawkins and Lar Lubovitch) receive unrestricted grants ranging from $1,000 to $5,000.

AT&T;, which makes grants to dance companies through its foundation, also supports several smaller groups in addition to selecting three companies each year to receive major touring support of companies’ programs. The Paul Taylor Dance Company over the past two years, both on tour and during New York seasons, acknowledged AT&T; sponsorship, as did New York City Ballet during its Western tour last fall.

Over the last few years, the news about corporate donations to dance has been primarily about growth and expansion, but those who work in this area feel wary about the future.

Elizabeth Cashour, director of development for the Paul Taylor Dance Company, notes that major funders have started to drop out of the picture and senses that donors are “moving back to a very conservative position.” She also remarks on the lack of a “strong middle ground” between those corporations that give major grants and those who only give on a much smaller scale.

The decline in art support from major oil companies such as Exxon and the large number of mergers and acquisitions taking place in the corporate marketplace are reasons causing Dioguardi and others to express concern about the immediate future. “I think there’s going to be a new pattern,” she says. “We are still waiting to see exactly what is going to happen.”